
AbstractBackgroundThe dynamic collimation system (DCS) provides energy layer‐specific collimation for pencil beam scanning (PBS) proton therapy using two pairs of orthogonal nickel trimmer blades. While excellent measurement‐to‐calculation agreement has been demonstrated for simple cube‐shaped DCS‐trimmed dose distributions, no comparison of measurement and dose calculation has been made for patient‐specific treatment plans.PurposeTo validate a patient‐specific quality assurance (PSQA) process for DCS‐trimmed PBS treatment plans and evaluate the agreement between measured and calculated dose distributions.MethodsThree intracranial patient cases were considered. Standard uncollimated PBS and DCS‐collimated treatment plans were generated for each patient using the Astroid treatment planning system (TPS). Plans were recalculated in a water phantom and delivered at the Miami Cancer Institute (MCI) using an Ion Beam Applications (IBA) dedicated nozzle system and prototype DCS. Planar dose measurements were acquired at two depths within low‐gradient regions of the target volume using an IBA MatriXX ion chamber array.ResultsMeasured and calculated dose distributions were compared using 2D gamma analysis with 3%/3 mm criteria and low dose threshold of 10% of the maximum dose. Median gamma pass rates across all plans and measurement depths were 99.0% (PBS) and 98.3% (DCS), with a minimum gamma pass rate of 88.5% (PBS) and 91.2% (DCS).ConclusionsThe PSQA process has been validated and experimentally verified for DCS‐collimated PBS. Dosimetric agreement between the measured and calculated doses was demonstrated to be similar for DCS‐collimated PBS to that achievable with noncollimated PBS.
Quality Assurance, Health Care, Brain Neoplasms, Phantoms, Imaging, Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted, Proton Therapy, Humans, Radiotherapy Dosage, Precision Medicine, Article
Quality Assurance, Health Care, Brain Neoplasms, Phantoms, Imaging, Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted, Proton Therapy, Humans, Radiotherapy Dosage, Precision Medicine, Article
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 2 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
